With continued practice in keeping it safe and simple (KISS), rescuers can learn to be more efficient with their equipment as well as in selecting
and setting up rigging anchors. Proficiency with this allows them to get a running start in constructing the foundation of all rescue systems.

1. Use an area that has a variety of simulated anchor opportunities. Try to create a mix of bombproof, substantial, and inappropriate anchors.

2. Clearly state the objectives and point out exactly where the lines have to fall in terms of plumb line, and whether it’s to be set up as a lowering system, safety line belay or static line (rappel line).

3. Have a variety of anchoring material and equipment available, such as utility straps, webbing, extra rope shorts, carabiners, tri-links, etc. Lay out limited amounts of this equipment.

4. Here are the rules:

• For each rotation, define the type of system to be built (lowering, static or belay) and the type of anchor system such as: bombproof, substantial
(multi-point) or self-equalizing.

• After each rotation, participants must give up a piece of equipment they used (i.e., if they used utility belts as anchors,
remove the belts from available equipment for the next rotation).

• Repeat as many times as participants can come up with solutions as you switch between anchor types, systems and available equipment.

5. With a little planning, you can come up with an order and number of rotations possible along with an equipment list that should end with just the rope and a device. This drill can be adjusted to help newer team members better understand rigging principles and techniques, or to challenge more experienced team members based on the number and type of rotations and equipment available.

6. Another way to challenge more experienced team members is to limit the knots to be used by providing a master list of knots. Then, eliminate a knot from the list after it has been used.

This drill will help new rescuers better understand their options while taking a good anchor rigger to the next level.

It is still happening out there, folks. Fatalities are still occurring during permit required confined space entries. Unfortunately, workers are dying
because the permit space (or the entrant) was not properly prepared prior to entry. And, tragically, many of these fatalities are the would-be
rescuers, who are trying to aid their co-workers! Most often, these would-be rescuers are authorized attendants or passersby that reacted improperly
and took heroic, but inappropriate action. Or they may have been professional rescuers, who were not trained or equipped for this type of rescue.

In nearly every case, these fatalities are completely preventable - simply by properly preparing the permit space prior to entry by isolating or if needed,
controlling all hazards. However, should an emergency arise, the rescue service must be prepared to respond to these types of emergencies. This includes
proper training and equipment to ensure a successful rescue and that everyone involved goes home safe and sound.

Considering Rescue Service Options

In a previous article, we outlined the three primary ways that an employer can ensure there is a proper confined space rescue service in place as part
of their written permit required confined space program. These options include:

(1) an in-house rescue team made up of host employees;

(2) a third party contracted rescue service, or

(3) relying on 911 emergency responders.

All three options have their benefits and their shortcomings. However, it is critically important that the employer focus on the entrant’s safety more
than any other consideration, be it monetary, personnel, equipment, or any other resource when deciding what type of rescue service to employ.

I get around…(no, not the Beach Boys’ song). I travel extensively visiting a variety of private and governmental sector work sites, and I also do
the trade show/lecture circuit. In my travels, I hear all sorts of variations to the “confined space rescue service” theme. Many employers use in-house
rescue teams and accept the funding and time commitments required to keep this capability proficient in the needed skills. Some employers rely on a
third party professional rescue service to meet this requirement. Sometimes these third party agreements are for the short term such as during turnarounds,
or even for sustaining operations as imbedded contractors. Still other employers rely on 911 public safety responders for their confined space rescue
needs.

All three options can and do work, but the one option that I hear having only a cursory vetting process in many cases is the 911 option. At times, I have
asked an employer to describe the extent of the agreement between their facility and the 911 responders. That’s when I typically hear an answer such
as, “Well, all our employees know the phone number to dial.” That’s when I offer to buy coffee so we can have a little chat. This article
will focus on using 911 as your confined space program rescue service.

Before I go any further, I want to say that in my view, our 911 emergency responders are true heroes. And many times, I feel they are under-appreciated.
Until a major national disaster hits, many of us are guilty of overlooking the risks that these men and women take on a regular basis. I also think it’s important for employers to understand the extensive set of skills, and wide variety of skills, that emergency responders are required to master in order to perform their primary job responsibilities.

Extensive Skill Requirements for Municipal Responders

For example, firefighters are required to maintain a wide variety of special skills, such as pump operations, ventilation, PPE, emergency vehicle driving,
along with medical skills such as advanced airway management, pharmacology, advanced cardiac life support and…are you getting the picture? The
skills and knowledge required to perform technical rope rescue is a specialty not typically included in a firefighter’s job description unless they
are assigned to a heavy technical rescue (HTR) squad.

NFPA 1006 (2013 edition, with next one coming in 2017) lists all the specialty areas that a rescue service may be called on to master. The first set of
requirements is established by the department’s authority having jurisdiction (AHJ) and may include such things as a minimum level of physical fitness,
HAZMAT training, emergency medical care training, and several other requirements. Then, there is what used to be referred to as “core skills” now known
as Job Performance Requirements. These requirements are extensive before even addressing any of the 19 different technical rescue specialty areas such
as: swift water rescue, trench rescue, machinery rescue, structural collapse rescue, wilderness rescue, and the list goes on. Also included in this
list is confined space rescue.

In Albuquerque, New Mexico, where I live, we are fortunate to have a dedicated HTR squad within our fire department that is trained, equipped, and staffed
24/7. This team is called upon to respond to flash-flood rescues in our many arroyos, mountain rescue in the peaks east of the city, vehicle entrapments
on two interstate highways as well as our surface streets, and may also be called to an employer’s work-site to perform a variety of rescues there.
This could be anything from trench rescue to – you guessed it – confined space rescue.

CS Emergencies Require Special Skills and Equipment

It is fairly rare that municipal responders are provided the resources (including specialized training and equipment) to safely and effectively respond
to confined space rescue emergencies. Rarer still, for these responders to have been afforded the opportunity to practice in the types of confined
space rescues that may be required in their local industrial corridors. Any rescue service would need to be trained and equipped in advance to handle
the many hazards and obstacles of permit required confined spaces.

It is the employer’s responsibility, both morally and legally, to engage with the 911 service that is being considered as their
confined space rescue service.

Appendix F of 1910.146 is a very valuable means to ensure that both the rescuers and the employer know what the requirements are and that proper agreements are in place prior to confined space entry operations.

Any shortfalls must be addressed. This may include lack of training, equipment, staffing, or many other requirements necessary to ensure a response appropriate
for the types and hazards of the spaces onsite.

OSHA states in section (d)(4) of 1910.146 that “the Employer shall provide rescue and emergency equipment needed to comply
with paragraph (d)(9) of this section, except to the extent that the equipment is provided by rescue services…” This is where an employer
and a public safety agency may enter a cooperative arrangement beyond what is already expected of the 911 responder's normal duties.

Funding through grants and other resources has become very lean in the last several years. As public safety budgets are trimmed down, both career and volunteer
fire departments must make budgetary decisions that in many cases result in sacrificing emergency service capabilities beyond firefighting and emergency
medical services. This would mean that many of the technical rescue capabilities outlined in NFPA 1006 are not within the means of many fire departments.
The impact on an employer may be that they lose a previously established ability to rely on a 911 agency for their confined space rescue needs, or
they may not be able to rely on that rescue service option during the development of their permit required confined space program.

However, we also understand that it is becoming more and more common for employers to provide rescue equipment and/or funding for rescue training specific
to the needs of the employer’s confined space program. Various state and local requirements may differ, but generally this can be accomplished by having
the employer set up a grant with monies being donated for specific training or equipment purchases. Depending on the local ordinances, equipment
can be directly transferred from the employer to the 911 agency through a simple agreement that outlines its intended purpose and ownership. There
may be tax advantages to the employer while benefiting the community as well. Bottom line...there are critical steps to take before relying solely
on a local 911 agency.

Evaluating Rescue Response Capabilities

Appendix F of 1910.146 clearly explains the need for employers to evaluate a prospective rescue service before depending upon their services. It states,

“Merely posting the service's number or planning to rely on the 911 emergency phone number to obtain these services at the time of a permit space emergency would not comply with paragraph (k)(1) of the standard.”

Other critical factors include response time and availability. Response time is generally extended when relying on an offsite rescue service such as 911.
According to OSHA, the response time must be appropriate for the types of known or potential hazards affecting the confined spaces at the employer’s
facility. Relevant factors include:

(1) Location of the rescue team or service relative to the employer's workplace

(2) Quality of roads and highways to be traveled

(3) Potential bottlenecks or traffic congestion that might be encountered in transit

(4) Reliability of the rescuer's vehicles, and the training and skill of its drivers

And, what about the availability of the rescue service? Is it unavailable at certain times of the day or in certain situations? What is the likelihood
that key personnel of the rescue service might be unavailable at times? If the rescue service becomes unavailable while an entry is underway, does
it have the capability of notifying the employer so that the entry operation can be aborted immediately?

In fact, these considerations also apply to any of the three means of providing a confined space rescue service, be it an in-house service, a contracted
service, or a 911 emergency response. However, response times and availability are typically crucial limitations in relying on 911 for confined space
rescue.

Careful Planning Required!

If you have identified 911 as the rescue service written into your confined space program, it is crucial that you take all the necessary steps to
vet the agency as being a good fit to protect your employees.

In addition to all requirements of Appendix F, it is of utmost importance to pay particular attention to the service’s ability to respond in a time appropriate
for your needs, and to ensure that reliable two way communications are in place. The 911 dispatch will be notified when entry operations are to commence;
and, just as importantly, the 911 dispatch will notify the employer when the service is not able to respond to an emergency so entry operations can
be immediately aborted.

With careful planning, thorough communications, and proper training and equipment, relying on 911 response for confined space
rescue can work. Unfortunately, in some instances, the outcome is tragic with loss of life not only to the entrants, but also to the unprepared 911
responders who had little clue as to what they were about to encounter. As an employer, it is your responsibility to make sure the rescue service is
adequately prepared!

Additional OSHA References:

1910.146(d)(9) Develop and implement procedures for summoning rescue and emergency services, for rescuing
entrants from permit spaces, for providing necessary emergency services to rescued employees, and for preventing unauthorized personnel from attempting
a rescue;

1910.146(k)(1) An employer who designates rescue and emergency services, pursuant to paragraph (d)(9)
of 1910.146(k)(1)(i). Evaluate a prospective rescuer's ability to respond to a rescue summons in a timely manner, considering the hazard(s) identified;

1910.146(k)(2)(i) Provide affected employees with the personal protective equipment (PPE) needed to conduct
permit space rescues safely and train affected employees so they are proficient in the use of that PPE, at no cost to those employees;

1910.146(k)(2)(ii) Train affected employees to perform assigned rescue duties. The employer must ensure
that such employees successfully complete the training required to establish proficiency as an authorized entrant, as provided by paragraphs (g) and
(h) of this section;

1910.146(k)(2)(iii) Train affected employees in basic first-aid and cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR).
The employer shall ensure that at least one member of the rescue team or service holding a current certification in first aid and CPR is available;
and

1910.146(k)(2)(iv) Ensure that affected employees practice making permit space rescues at least once every
12 months, by means of simulated rescue operations in which they remove dummies, manikins, or actual persons from the actual permit spaces or from
representative permit spaces. Representative permit spaces shall, with respect to opening size, configuration, and accessibility, simulate the types
of permit spaces from which rescue is to be performed.

Note to paragraph (k)(l)(i): What will be considered timely will vary according to the specific hazards involved in each entry. For example, §1910.134, Respiratory Protection, requires that employers provide a standby person or persons capable of immediate action to rescue employee(s) wearing respiratory protection while in work areas defined as IDLH atmospheres.

One
of our awesome customers had a great safety idea, and we wanted to share it with you…a Roco Safer Way banner. Of course, if you’ve ever been
a Roco student, you’ve heard it many times…”there’s a safe way and a safer way!” Now you can win a FREE Roco Safety Banner (4-ft x
2-ft) for your workplace.

During a plant turnaround, this customer used the Roco Safer Way banner to keep safety at the forefront – while maybe also offering a subtle reminder
for everyone to be grateful for their on-site emergency responders! It is our hope that these banners will encourage someone to think (or re-think)
a situation and make it even safer!

Register now to win a Roco Safety banner and remind your personnel of the safer way!

Construction is well underway on expansions and improvements to the Roco Training Center (RTC.) The
goal is to add new confined space shapes and configurations in order to simulate an even wider variety of scenarios that rescuers may face
in the real world.

An additional two-story container configuration is being erected east of the pipe rack module. This will add 10 vertical confined spaces, 2
horizontal confined spaces, and 7 more student platforms for staging rescue equipment and training evolutions. The new area will be under a covered
roof, making rescue training on the prop a bit more user-friendly in our south Louisiana climate!

Nearly complete is the new stairway on the south side of the prop that will provide additional access to the structure and more anchor points
for rescue students taking courses at RTC. With these new features, the prop is increasing its student capacity by approximately 33 rescuers per
day.

Last year a boiler simulator was added which focuses on extremely tight (12" x 15") horizontal confined spaces found at
many industrial settings, old and new.

"Roco is constantly surveying our students to find out what their particular problem spaces are," said Dennis O'Connell, Director of Training for Roco. "We try to duplicate those confined spaces at RTC, so students can practice the skills they will need if a problem occurs at their site. This way, they get a more accurate experience."

The anticipated completion date for the additions to RTC is April 15, 2015. It is sure to add a few more challenges for Roco students who are familiar
with the prop, as well as a few more conveniences.

READER QUESTION:Our company procedures require an on-site rescue capability for permit- required confined space entry operations during normal Monday-Friday “day shift” operations, but for entries other than during that shift, we rely on an off-site rescue service. Shouldn’t the rescue capability, specifically the rescue response time, be the same no matter when the permit required confined space entries are being made?

ROCO TECH PANEL ANSWER:
Yes; and no, not necessarily.

Yes, if the nature of any known or potential hazards that may affect the entrants in the permit space, and the configuration of the confined
space are the same during regular M-F day shift as they would be during off-shift entries, then the answer is yes. The rescue capability regarding
response time, manning, equipment, and overall performance capability should be the same.

No, not necessarily. For example, if the nature of the known or potential hazards of a permit space entered during the day shift requires
a shorter response time, or if the configuration of the space requires a higher level of rescue expertise, rescuer PPE, number of rescue personnel,
or if there is any other factor that may require a different performance capability than the requirements of the day shift entries, then no, the same
rescue capability would not necessarily be required.

This is because OSHA 1910.146 is a performance-based standard. For confined space rescue, specifically regarding what would be considered “prompt rescue,”
the performance standard will be most influenced by the nature of the potential and known hazards and how quickly the hazards will affect the authorized
entrants, as well as the complexity of providing effective rescue from the particular permit-required confined space.

To demonstrate this point, here are some extracts from OSHA 1910.146 Permit Required Confined Space Regulation Section K, the Summary and Explanation of
the Final Rule, and also from OSHA 1910.146 Appendix F.

From 1910.146 (k)(1)(i)“Evaluate a prospective rescuer's ability to respond to a rescue summons in a timely manner, considering the hazard(s) identified;

Note to paragraph (k)(1)(i): What will be considered timely will vary according to the specific hazards involved in each entry. For example, §1910.134, Respiratory Protection, requires that employers provide a standby person or persons capable of immediate action to rescue employee(s) wearing respiratory protection while in work areas defined as IDLH atmospheres.”

From the Summary and Explanation of the Final Rule (1910.146) “OSHA has therefore decided to promulgate the requirement it proposed for "timely" rescue, a requirement that was not opposed by any rulemaking participant, rather than to define precisely what is timely. That determination will be based on the particular circumstances and hazards of each confined space, circumstances and hazards which the employer must take into account in developing a rescue plan. OSHA has added a note to paragraph (k)(1)(i) to clarify this point.”

From 1910.146 Appendix F, A. Initial Evaluation, II, 1.“What are the needs of the employer with regard to response time (time for the rescue service to receive notification, arrive at the scene, and set up and be ready for entry)? For example, if entry is to be made into an IDLH atmosphere, or into a space that can quickly develop an IDLH atmosphere (if ventilation fails or for other reasons), the rescue team or service would need to be standing by at the permit space. On the other hand, if the danger to entrants is restricted to mechanical hazards that would cause injuries (e.g., broken bones, abrasions) a response time of 10 or 15 minutes might be adequate.”

The response time of the rescue service is also different than the time needed to provide rescue. Response time generally means the time it takes for the
rescue service to arrive on scene. From that time forward, the rescue service must perform a size-up, identify and don PPE, set up rescue systems,
and perform many other tasks before initiating entry rescue. Any need to provide victim packaging or to deliver breathing air to the victim will add
to the total time it takes to complete the rescue.

Therefore, it is imperative that the employer ensures that the measure of “Prompt Rescue” is driven by the nature of the known or potential hazards of
the permitted confined space as well as the complexities of the configuration of the space and how those will effect the time required to the setup
the rescue system.

Roco provides confined space rescue services for a variety of industries and is confronted with a very wide range of hazards associated with the entry
operations and a vast range of space configurations. The determination on the rescue team’s posture is based primarily on the answer to the following
questions.

1. How quickly will the entrants be overcome by the known or potential hazard(s) of the space, and /or how quickly will the entrants suffer permanent injury if exposed to those hazards?

2. If non-entry retrieval systems are not employed due to the system not contributing to an effective rescue, or the retrieval system creates a greater hazard, how much time would be needed to arrive on scene, set up an entry rescue system to support the entrant rescuer(s) and the victim(s)?

These are just two of the primary questions that we consider for our CSRT operations. If the nature of the known or potential hazards would require a near
immediate rescue of the entrant(s), we would assume a “Rescue Standby” posture where the rescue systems are pre-rigged, the entrant rescuers are already
in appropriate PPE or have it available to be quickly donned, and the rescue effort can be initiated in a very short time in an effort to meet that
“Prompt Rescue” performance benchmark.

It is vitally important that the employer honestly evaluates the nature of the hazards or potential hazards of the permitted confined spaces that they
plan on entering. This can be accomplished by reviewing product SDS (Safety Data Sheets), understanding the nature of the hazards that are not included
in the SDS, and always considering worst case scenarios. Additionally, the employer must include an evaluation of the time it would take the rescue
service to arrive on scene as well as the additional time to safely assess the situation and setup the required rescue systems prior to initiating
rescue.

The answer to the question of a different rescue capabilities based on the “day shift” or “night shift/week-ends” can only be answered by performing a
thorough assessment of the permitted spaces. And, on a case by case basis, determine if the rescue capability for that particular entry operation does
indeed meet the spirit of “Prompt Rescue.”

RescueTalk (RocoRescue.com) has been created as a free resource for sharing insightful information, news, views and commentary for our students and others who are interested in technical rope rescue. Therefore, we make no representations as to accuracy, completeness, or suitability of any information and are not liable for any errors, omissions, or delays in this information or any losses, injuries, or damages arising from its display or use. All information is provided on an as-is basis. Users and readers are 100% responsible for their own actions in every situation. Information presented on this website in no way replaces proper training!